Implementation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s Judgment dated 27th Oct 2015 in Civil Application No. 554 of 2006 with regard to recovery of Duty Free Credit Entitlement (DFCE) Scheme Scrips for the exports made in the year 2003- 04.
The Notification No.08 (RE 2006)/2004-2009 dated 12th June 2006 and Notification No. 20 (RE 2006)/2004-2009 dated 13th July 2006 are hereby rescinded ab-initio. The Target Plus Scheme is implemented as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 27.10.2015 in CA No.554 of 2006.
Implementation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s Judgment dated 27th Oct 2015 in Civil Application No. 554 of 2006 with regard to Target Plus Scheme (TPS) Scrips for the exports made in the year 2005-06 over 2004-05
IAF facilitates credit of redemption proceeds in the bank account of the investor on the same day of redemption request. In order to further enhance the reach of Mutual Funds (MFs) towards the retail investors, it has been decided to issue guidelines for extending IAF. MFs/ AMCs may offer IAF subject to the following conditions:
THE BIHAR GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 AN ACT to make a provision for levy and collection of tax on intra- State supply of goods or services or both by the State of Bihar and the matters connected therewith or incidental thereto
Up to the tax year 2011 dividend has been first included in the total income and thereafter deduction has been granted. The facts mentioned above clearly establish that the Assessee Society is entitled to getting credit for the deemed dividend tax by virtue of the provisions of DTAA read with Section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
CBDT has released the draft rules prescribing ‘unquoted shares’ valuation for purposes of Sec. 56(2)(x)/50CA (an important development impacting corporate restructuring) inviting comments from public.
In ACIT Vs. Texool Ltd., the Mumbai ITAT allowed deduction on rent directly paid to the authority on behalf of Lessor under an Oral agreement. However, the relief was granted subject to a condition that the lessor has offered the same in his return of income.
The definition of business auxiliary service may not cover the transaction in this case, as the main appellant is not promoting or marketing of services provided by PFL as there is no service which has been provided by PFL in the case in hand.
These two appeals are by the assessees against the respective orders of the CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad dated 29.07.2016. Even though many issues are contested, mainly the issue pertain to whether the income offered by the assessee has to be assessed under capital gains or under ‘other sources.
